Friedman IR-Load

[Boudoir Guitar]

I’m hoping so! I figured the power side of things were no different than the preamp side and all it was going to take was someone legitimately INTO it to put the time in and develop it in the same way Cliff did with modeling back in the day.

I think as a result of hearing Dave shit on modeling over the years, I can’t tell if he’s finally at the point of acknowledging “Yes, it can be great if the time is put into it” or if he’s just adapting to the digital world regardless of what he thinks of the actual product. Regardless, I’m stoked to hear it and am definitely hopeful it blows everyone away.

"modeling is great...when it helps me sell tube amps". Not remotely meant as a slight.

 

[DrewJD82]

On the one hand, pretty cool. On the other hand -- that winds up being a lot of boxes and weight to...run a digital model of one of the more critical parts of the tube amp you are wanting to use? I get why a lot of people will love using this; I just don't get why that's remotely more appealing than just running a good digital modeler into a good power amp.

Until I actually hear it, the appeal is mainly in the attention given to this area. We’ve got modelers and FRFR cabs galore, but power amps have largely been an afterthought in the modeling world and really, more products that close the gap between tubes amps and modeling is more gooder in my book. While I’m fine with a 6L6 power section for every amp I use, I can see some being picky about getting the power section right or having it feel exactly the same as it would when playing out a cab. Or if this can swap impedance curves around, for everyone not using a Fractal unit that could be a bonus.

 

[Chocol8]

Or if this can swap impedance curves around, for everyone not using a Fractal unit that could be a bonus.

I don't think that's what it does. Based on what Synergy posted on FB, I believe it scans the impedance curve of the connected cabinet and then it uses digital magic fairy dust to make the proprietary (not yet another off the shelf ICE product) class D power amp behave like a tube amp interacting with the cab.

It seems like you would use this with preamp pedals and modelers with the SIC turned off, while driving real guitar cabs. I am not sure about any of this yet, but that's what I am gathering from what's been posted.

 

[DrewJD82]

I don't think that's what it does. Based on what Synergy posted on FB, I believe it scans the impedance curve of the connected cabinet and then it uses digital magic fairy dust to make the proprietary (not yet another off the shelf ICE product) class D power amp behave like a tube amp interacting with the cab.

It seems like you would use this with preamp pedals and modelers with the SIC turned off, while driving real guitar cabs. I am not sure about any of this yet, but that's what I am gathering from what's been posted.

Ahhhh I gotcha. Whatever it is, I’m down for it. Even if I don’t dig it, I’m stoked this area is getting attention.

 

[MTB1973]

Oh yeah, I hope it delivers. Looking forward to the reviews, etc.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

Until I actually hear it, the appeal is mainly in the attention given to this area. We’ve got modelers and FRFR cabs galore, but power amps have largely been an afterthought in the modeling world and really, more products that close the gap between tubes amps and modeling is more gooder in my book. While I’m fine with a 6L6 power section for every amp I use, I can see some being picky about getting the power section right or having it feel exactly the same as it would when playing out a cab. Or if this can swap impedance curves around, for everyone not using a Fractal unit that could be a bonus.

I feel like there are two scenarios:

(1). Have tube amp, need a really accurate load for amp.
(2). Use digital modeler; need a really accurate model of the amp.

Each of those needs one thing: an accurate power amp with sufficient current reserves for the transients your playing/volume need.

Some folks have been underwhelmed by ICEpower stuff. That bears out in audio testing. See the reviews here of ICEpower 200ASC (see: Power Stage 200) and a sub-$600 Hypex-based power amp. Guitarists aren't the only ones finding ICEpower to be "fine, I guess". So to the extent there is a problem in the guitar space its either that guitar companies are still using known mediocre power amp designs or that guitarists are unwilling to use stuff not made by a guitar company:

ICEpower 200AC & 200ASC Review (Class D Amp)

This is a review and detailed measurements of a DIY combination of ICEpower 200AC and 200ASC in a Ghent audio case. It was kindly supplied by a local member. Total part cost is US $310. The case work is fine: I like the hefty power switch which also acts as protection circuit indicator...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Buckeye NC252MP Stereo Amplifier Review

This is a review and detailed measurements of the Buckeye NC252MP balanced stereo class D amplifier. It was kindly drop shipped to me by a member and costs US $575. The amp is almost the size of a loaf of bread and literally weighs nearly as much! Amazing how far amplification technology has...

www.audiosciencereview.com

Maybe I'm misunderstanding, but it seems the strategy of this device is:

Have tube amp, use good but not perfect load and then fix it in the mix afterwards with some digital modeling. I get why they are going that way -- pretty hard to "correct" for every cabinet one might throw at a thing via the load. But leaves me completely unenthused -- once I'm having to correct things digitally in order to be able to use a tube amp I have ZERO interest in using the tube amp.

 

[Chocol8]

For sure glad to see attention in this area. There are a lot of us who use digital with real cabs and the current selection of power amps to do so pretty much sucks. PS170, BAM, Pedal Baby etc. all come up way short.

The amps I mostly use are old discontinued models like the MosVales from the early 90's or old hifi gear like the MacIntosh amps from the late 60's to early 70's. These are both getting expensive (relatively) and almost always need a little work.

If Synergy has come up with something better and it's priced right I am in. The Friedman product also looks interesting as a PS-2/100 alternative or an alternative to using s Suhr RL with a separate power amp. I gave up hope that Suhr would come out with something like this, so to see the BAD guys collab on it is a pleasant surprise.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

It seems like you would use this with preamp pedals and modelers with the SIC turned off, while driving real guitar cabs. I am not sure about any of this yet, but that's what I am gathering from what's been posted.

Or with the "reactance" or whatever the knob is turned all the way off and now its just working as a power amp I think?

 

[Chocol8]

Or with the "reactance" or whatever the knob is turned all the way off and now its just working as a power amp I think?

Yeah, I didn't fully understand that. From what I read, at one end it acts like a flat amp (but with the ML sic included or not???) and at the other end it acts like a Friedman 6L6 power amp. Maybe that's to allow it to work with SIC on or off in a modeler, adjust to taste? The comments I read were unclear to me.

 

[Whizzinby]

The Friedman product also looks interesting as a PS-2/100 alternative or an alternative to using s Suhr RL with a separate power amp.

I’m not sure. (Going off the incomplete info we have)

The reason the PS2/PS100 is so popular attenuating/reamping is because it has a ton of clean headroom itself. You can knock the DB’s down but still retain all the headroom. I can’t imagine a 100w solid state power amp providing that sort of headroom. I have a hard time believing it isn’t going to scale down the overall soundstage considerably, versus a PS2/100. I’ve owned a Bam 100 and SD170 and while they could get decently loud, I don’t think they are directly comparable in any way to the 50/100w power sections in the Fryettes.

And for the Suhr RL, I think the majority of people are using it for a simple way to record. Not necessarily turn around and reamp. The gap the Friedman has to bridge here for the load, is the impedance thing being meaningful enough to cover the price gap between this and a $300 Suhr RL.

I think this could be cool, but I don’t know that’s it’s going to displace any one individual segment of devices. Seems like something for a kitchen sink approach.

Granted, we still don’t know everything about it. I’m sure it’s going to be cool.

 

[Chocol8]

I can’t imagine a 100w solid state power amp providing that sort of headroom.

That's only because you are used to modern crap over rated, underpowered SS amps marketed to guitarists. Trust me, if you spent 30 seconds playing my McIntosh 2100 solid state power amp, you wouldn't think it was in anyway lacking power or headroom compared to a 100w tube amp.

One of the claims I read about the IR-Load was that it had enough SS power to act like a 100w tube amp, which means if rated like the standard low grade Class D we are used to it would probably be speced much higher. It's interesting that they claimed the 50w Wampler pedal was 50 watts no matter the nominal impedance of the load and I infer that the 100w rating of the IR-Load will be the same. That in itself is pretty promising compared to current solutions that deliver 1/4 the power into 16 ohms vs 4!

The big question is the power supply. If designed right and there is enough juice behind it, there is no reason a SS amp can't deliver as much headroom as a PS 100. Well, no reasons other than cost size and weight, so we will have to see what tradeoffs they have chosen. My hope is that they didn't compromise in sound quality and power, and the price is still reasonable. It ain't gunna be cheap to deliver that, but hopefully not too far from the PS-2 and PS-100 range which is around $800 - $1200.

 

[Whizzinby]

That's only because you are used to modern crap over rated, underpowered SS amps marketed to guitarists. Trust me, if you spent 30 seconds playing my McIntosh 2100 solid state power amp, you wouldn't think it was in anyway lacking power or headroom compared to a 100w tube amp.

One of the claims I read about the IR-Load was that it had enough SS power to act like a 100w tube amp, which means if rated like the standard low grade Class D we are used to it would probably be speced much higher. It's interesting that they claimed the 50w Wampler pedal was 50 watts no matter the nominal impedance of the load and I infer that the 100w rating of the IR-Load will be the same. That in itself is pretty promising compared to current solutions that deliver 1/4 the power into 16 ohms vs 4!

The big question is the power supply. If designed right and there is enough juice behind it, there is no reason a SS amp can't deliver as much headroom as a PS 100. Well, no reasons other than cost size and weight, so we will have to see what tradeoffs they have chosen. My hope is that they didn't compromise in sound quality and power, and the price is still reasonable. It ain't gunna be cheap to deliver that, but hopefully not too far from the PS-2 and PS-100 range which is around $800 - $1200.

I hope it’s awesome.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

That's only because you are used to modern crap over rated, underpowered SS amps marketed to guitarists. Trust me, if you spent 30 seconds playing my McIntosh 2100 solid state power amp, you wouldn't think it was in anyway lacking power or headroom compared to a 100w tube amp.

One of the claims I read about the IR-Load was that it had enough SS power to act like a 100w tube amp, which means if rated like the standard low grade Class D we are used to it would probably be speced much higher. It's interesting that they claimed the 50w Wampler pedal was 50 watts no matter the nominal impedance of the load and I infer that the 100w rating of the IR-Load will be the same. That in itself is pretty promising compared to current solutions that deliver 1/4 the power into 16 ohms vs 4!

The big question is the power supply. If designed right and there is enough juice behind it, there is no reason a SS amp can't deliver as much headroom as a PS 100. Well, no reasons other than cost size and weight, so we will have to see what tradeoffs they have chosen. My hope is that they didn't compromise in sound quality and power, and the price is still reasonable. It ain't gunna be cheap to deliver that, but hopefully not too far from the PS-2 and PS-100 range which is around $800 - $1200.

Isn’t being able to double the power into half the load a GOOD thing for a solid state power amp? If it doesn’t…low on current reserve?

 

[Chocol8]

Isn’t being able to double the power into half the load a GOOD thing for a solid state power amp? If it doesn’t…low on current reserve?

It depends on how you look at it, but generally no. If the amp is voltage limited (most SS), it can put much power into higher ohm loads. It may also be current limited and unable to drive 2 ohm loads, but that's not usually as big of an issue for us in the guitar world. Think of a 16 ohm or even 8 ohm cab with an impedance curve that rises with frequency and you will see why the budget ICE boards crap out way early.

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

It depends on how you look at it, but generally no. If the amp is voltage limited (most SS), it can put much power into higher ohm loads. It may also be current limited and unable to drive 2 ohm loads, but that's not usually as big of an issue for us in the guitar world. Think of a 16 ohm or even 8 ohm cab with an impedance curve that rises with frequency and you will see why the budget ICE boards crap out way early.

If it can’t double its power into a reduced load, isn’t it necessarily current limited?

 

[Chocol8]

If it can’t double its power into a reduced load, isn’t it necessarily current limited?

Sure but it depends on what load its rated at and what you will use it with. Typically, modern SS amps are rated at 4 ohms and have enough current (barely) to meet the rating. When you use 8 ohm and 16 ohm guitar cabs, they don't have a current problem because those loads need half or 1/4 of the current, but then you are voltage limited.

For simplification, say you have 20v into 4ohms, so 5 amps of current and 100W. Now switch to a guitar cab with impedance climbing over 20 ohms in the upper mid/highs and you have the same 20v, 1 or less amps and 20 watts or less!

 

[Boudoir Guitar]

Sure but it depends on what load its rated at and what you will use it with. Typically, modern SS amps are rated at 4 ohms and have enough current (barely) to meet the rating. When you use 8 ohm and 16 ohm guitar cabs, they don't have a current problem because those loads need half or 1/4 of the current, but then you are voltage limited.

For simplification, say you have 20v into 4ohms, so 5 amps of current and 100W. Now switch to a guitar cab with impedance climbing over 20 ohms in the upper mid/highs and you have the same 20v, 1 or less amps and 20 watts or less!

None of this has anything to do with why its a good thing that the Wampler pedal is just rated 50 watts regardless of load.

 

[Chocol8]

None of this has anything to do with why its a good thing that the Wampler pedal is just rated 50 watts regardless of load.

It means it has more voltage capacity. So if 50 watts into 16 ohms, it has at least the voltage range of a 200 watt at 4 ohm amp.

 

[[Nathan]]

Sounds like the Wampler power amp pedal will be stereo 50 watts into 4 8, or 16 ohms in a small pedalboard friendly package. That could be interesting if it really has the power to sound like a 40-50 watt tube amp.

If he’s doing something like that and has this poweramp mojo in it as well, infinitely more useful than the Friedman.

 

[Frodebro]

If he’s doing something like that and has this poweramp mojo in it as well, infinitely more useful than the Friedman.

That depends entirely on the intended application.